Jump to content

fasteddie

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    2,774
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by fasteddie

  1. On 01/05/2017 at 10:59 AM, jak2002003 said:

    So you carry dog treats in your pockets 24 / 7 do you?  You must smell nice.

     

    I don't have the time to stop, give a few treats, and have a nice conversation with the 100s of dogs in my area every day.... I am jealous of you if you have nothing else to do apart from having you doggy chats and tea parties every single day you are here.

    Good!

     

  2. 12 hours ago, Keesters said:

     

    You give them titbits! I hope you clean up the poop this causes. If not, and I suspect NOT, then you are as filthy as the dogs. Keep Thailand clean and that includes NO DOG POOP on our public streets and beaches.

     

    Yeah I have a strict routine, talk to them nicely, feed them titbits then follow them around until they crap. You know, it's mealy mouthed miseries like you that give many of us the opinion, dogs are better than humans!

  3. 5 hours ago, foxboy said:

    I don't know how you've managed that.. I've been coming for 10 years and have had many dog incidents... been chased by packs of soi dogs, been bitten once, had dogs try to bite me whilst jogging and also when riding the moped, had to swerve at speed to avoid dogs trying to attack me, had dogs defend a soi to a point where I've had to turn back..

     

    I think you should get out more

    Ha Ha, you might be right.

  4. 8 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said:

    You're wrong.

     

     

     

     

    http://driving-in-thailand.com/road-markings-and-traffic-lights/

     

    An unbroken solid line cannot be crossed.

     

    The Thais were wrong to stop (on a bend) in the center of the road, in order to illegally cross a very easily seen solid yellow dividing line.

    So you can't make a right turn out of your property or a soi? Don't be daft, it means no overtaking, nothing else.

  5. 6 hours ago, nauseus said:

    That's just a blatantly biased opinion, Grayling is committed and demented Europhile and RIC (Remoaner-In-Chief).

     

    Constitutionally, the referendum result was decisive and binding and not just advisory. The result authorizes and mandates the British Government to exercise its legal power to give notice to leave the EU under Article 50.

     

    Mr. Cameron said before the referendum that the result would be respected and acted on by the government. If he thought he could have managed any way to survive by ignoring all of that, he probably would have done it. 

    I take it you didn't bother reading "Briefing paper 07212", the referendum was legally not binding and very far from decisive.

  6. 3 hours ago, bangrak said:

    What a waste of trees to print over 434 (four-hunderd-thirty-four!) pages such a North Korean glorifying fable about 'the great leader''s (via his puppet/clone-sister's) fabuloulsly successfull(y ruinous) rice scam (Nr.2)!

    'The writers said the book is about the benefits the farmers gained from the Yingluck Shinawatra government's rice subsidy scheme': when it would be 'news', this would be the perfect example of fake news!

    This is really scandalous, as the 'grassroots', the small, poor farmers got nothing, zilch, nada from the rice schemes(scams), but prices for seeds, fertilizer, pesticides higher than ever before, higher interest rates for loans, etc. (guess who collected most of the extra money generated by it: the 'friends of'...), ...that while the production of their rice culture was deemed too small for them to even participate to the (in)glorious scheme! Yes, red apologists, they probably would still follow the Shins' orders in an election, voting personally (under the watchfull eyes of ...), or 'renting-out' their ID-cards for a few days...

    In fact, it would also be interesting to know who has been financing the printing and distribution of this masterwork of misleading propaganda...

    The 'book' coming out now hasn't of course any link with the court hearings of Yingluck and the associated scammers being, at last, nearing their end, for sure, ...nor aiming to create any pressure on the ones to issue a sentence about the scam, ...and of course could never be associated with the intent to stir up tensions in the 'red territories' in case of a negative outcome for the scammers...

    To conclude: the writers (as the inspirers(!), and sponsors(!)?) of the book cannot be accused of hypocrisy when they say it has been written 'about' the farmers, and not 'for' the farmers, as who could expect poor and, alas, little educated farmers to spend their short nights of rest to attempt(!) reading such a 434 pages logorrhea, even when they would get the book for free!

    Why and for whom was this book written...? 

    :coffee1:

×
×
  • Create New...